Our opponents can't have it both ways either Christianity is wickedly bellicose, destructive, and murderous or it is passive, enervating and beneficial only for women and children. Our opponents have argued both ways and sometimes at the same time. How easily the Crusades are trotted out as exhibit one for the horrible viciousness that arises out of the Christian faith! Richard, Cœur de Lion, is used to show that Islam and Christianity are equivalent religions, that is, equally deluded. You see, they both have Jihad as part of their dogma: "Wipe out those unbelievers." Conveniently, this ignores the Christian religion's specific injunction that we are to love our enemies and do good to those who persecute us; no violent pay back for injuries real or imagine can be contemplated by the children of the King of love. If violence were perpetrated by people who claimed the name of Christian, they were outliers, men who perverted the religion of Christ. Suffice it to say that Islam has a harder time making that case, given the fact that its founder waged wars of extirpation against those who opposed him and his fanaticism. The founder of Christianity declined a military career in no uncertain terms and refused to wipe out His enemies (Lk 9:54-55).

But then maybe the Christian religion makes weaklings and slaves of those who trust the Nazarene. Our opponents criticize the church as only useful for women and children. Here is a not-too-subtle prejudice against women, labeling them weak and subject to religious fanaticism. Such opponents will also criticize the European churches for being full of only women and children. This is hardly fair, correct though it is to say that the European churches are populated by the distaff side of humanity. It is unfair to describe Christianity as a woman's religion and then to criticize the churches when they are full of women. And you say that Christianity is full of contradictions?! I think our opponents are giving us a run for our contradiction money.